Another Betrayal Against Women's Reproductive Choice by Obama - it just does not END

[faceit]

Just TRY and defend this indefensible SLAP in the face & spit in the face to women's reproductive health and safety...

Obama has totally 100% lost me.

Read it and weep.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-07-16/obama-ban-on-abortion-coverage-sparks-feminist-outrage/?om_rid=DXn0aN&om_mid=_BMQbK0B8O5mtNt&

This EXTENDS beyond the two horrible provisions already in the health insurance company profiteering bill that reduce women's reproductive rights.

"Reproductive rights advocates spent the earlier part of the week advocating for expanded access to birth control under the law and say they are shocked by the development, which pushes abortion back to the center of the debate. “We are deeply disappointed,” Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said in a statement.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said, “This decision puts in place a three-year restriction that is similar to the proposal from Rep. Bart Stupak that was rejected during the legislative debate on health reform.”

Indeed, the new abortion ban is not required by either the health-care reform bill or the president’s March executive order, which promised that no federal funds would be spent on abortions in the health insurance exchanges that launch in 2014. That order stopped short of banning abortion coverage, instead adopting Sen. Ben Nelson’s proposal for a dual accounting system in which federal dollars cannot be used to fund abortion but consumers’ private insurance co-pays and deductibles can. The order did not mention the pre-existing condition insurance plan at all. The controversy began Tuesday, when the conservative National Right to Life Committee released a statement claiming that Pennsylvania’s version of the pre-existing condition insurance program would use federal dollars to fund abortion coverage. As other social conservative groups, such as the Family Research Council, piled on, a key fact was obscured: Customers in these new high-risk insurance pools are expected to pay up to $600 monthly out of pocket for the coverage, which will be provided by private insurance companies.

In other words, though the federal government subsidized the coverage, there is no reason why abortions could not be paid for by private monies, under the very dual-accounting structure set-up by the president’s executive order.

But instead of clarifying that point, the Department of Health and Human Services responded by declaring, “Abortions will not be covered in the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan except in the cases of rape or incest, or where the life of the woman would be endangered.”

[Greyhound]

1. K&R for more of that "change".

[faceit]

2. I can't even look at him anymore. I have to turn of the radio or tv when he comes on.

Just like I did with Bush...

I feel literally sick to my stomach.

[Egnever]

3. .

:crazy:

[sandnsea]

6. See #4

I can't figure out whether the left or the right tells more lies about the man.

[Egnever]

9. Thanks but the total outrage here of everything obama

is beyond obvious at this point. Kudos to you for even bothering with this tripe though Sandsea :hi:

[Pisces]

29. So do I when I read these ridiculous posts

[Bluebear]

39. +

[sandnsea]

4. Statement was in response to right-to-lifer lies

Absolutely nothing has changed since health care reform was passed.

"The National Right to Life Committee's Douglas Johnson contends abortion coverage could be permitted in Pennsylvania's high-risk pool because a state law says that physicians can perform abortions if they consider them "'necessary' based on 'all factors (physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman's age) relevant to the well-being of the woman."

Obama administration and Pennsylvania officials dispute Johnson's interpretation. Rosanne Placey of the Pennsylvania Department of Insurance said, "We absolutely do not cover elective abortions," noting that the state also prohibits the procedure under existing federally funded programs, including Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (Rovner, Kaiser Health News/NPR's "Shots," 7/14)."

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/194930.php

[enlightenment]

17. Oddly, a lot of educated and well-informed people

don't agree with your assessment.

The article you quote from says it was a reprint from the National Partnership for Women and Families - and it is, from the 15th. They have since published a couple of additional opinions that rather suggest many educated and well-informed people believe this is a change from the administration's position:

Excluding Coverage for Abortion Services From High-Risk Insurance Pools is "Unnecessary & Punitive"

Statement of Judith L. Lichtman, Senior Advisor, National Partnership for Women & Families

WASHINGTON, DC — July 15, 2010 — "For the next few years, temporary insurance plans for those with pre-existing conditions will be the best and only way that millions of Americans — including many women of child-bearing age — can get health insurance coverage. It is unnecessary and punitive for the Obama Administration to adopt rules that prevent women from using their own private resources to purchase coverage for abortion services in these plans.

Congress passed no law that made this necessary, and it will mean that women with health problems — who are more likely to have high-risk pregnancies — will go without the care they need. Abortion is part of the spectrum of reproductive health services that are essential to women’s health and well-being. It is a commonly-used, legal medical procedure that should not be treated differently than other health services. We are deeply disappointed that the Administration failed to make the health and well-being of women the paramount consideration in this matter."

http://www.nationalpartnership.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=25259&security=2141&news_iv_ctrl=1741

HHS Restrictions on Abortion Coverage in High-Risk Pools Elicit Criticism

July 16, 2010 — Some abortion-rights groups are criticizing HHS' recent announcement that state high-risk insurance pools generally will not include coverage for elective abortions, CQ HealthBeat reports. The insurance pools -- created under the federal health reform law (PL 111-148) -- are intended to provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions (Norman, CQ HealthBeat, 7/15).

<snip - paragraph on administration comment>

National Women's Law Center Co-President Marcia Greenberger is calling on HHS to reconsider its decision because women enrolled in the pools would be using private funds to obtain abortion coverage. "This decision will prevent women with serious pre-existing medical conditions from getting the abortion coverage they need to protect their health, even when they pay for such coverage themselves," she said (CQ HealthBeat, 7/15).

Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement Thursday that the group is "deeply disappointed that the administration has voluntarily and unnecessarily decided to impose limits on private funds used to purchase insurance coverage for abortion care in the new high-risk insurance pools." She added that the decision is "truly harmful" to the women enrolled in the pools, who are "likely to be more vulnerable to medically complicated pregnancies," and thus more likely to need an abortion. Richards also said that HHS' decision "has no basis in the law and flies in the face of the intent of the high-risk pools that were meant to meet the medical needs of some of the most vulnerable women in this country" (Pecquet, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 7/15).

http://www.nationalpartnership.org/site/News2?abbr=daily2_&page=NewsArticle&id=25265&security=1201&news_iv_ctrl=-1

I suppose you're right and all these educated and well-informed people are wrong. Gads. Where would we be without you to tell us how to think?

[sandnsea]

18. Yes. They are wrong.

The statement was in response to lies from a right to life group. Period. The legislation is exactly what was passed. No, there is nothing in it that says they can't provide elective abortions. Obama gave his word, signed an Executive Order, remember?

I don't know why women's groups do this. The federal government is not going to provide elective abortions. The direct federal pre-existing insurance program was never going to have elective abortions.

I've come to the conclusion that many groups do this just to raise money.

[enlightenment]

27. Hey -

thanks for the reminder. I had almost forgotten that it's a waste of time to attempt to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

[Pisces]

31. I agree with you completely.

[faceit]

26. You are completely wrong. You might want to read the top rated post on DU today

And educate yourself on the truth of this subject...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x876349

[sandnsea]

33. top rated bash of the day

DU's opinion is useless anymore.

[another saigon]

35. no fair!

we can't have facts ruin the fable.

[ProSense]

36. Yesterday, Geithner opposes Warren was the top

overrated posts (multiple) of the day. All based on a rumor, which was denied.

[regnaD kciN]

5. And YOU'VE totally lost ME...

Sorry, but anyone on DU who uses "Obama" and "betrayal" together in the same sentence gets disregarded in perpetuity by me. (NOTE TO MODS: This is not the same as saying I'm putting them on my "ignore" list.) Seriously, if you think Obama is a traitor, and has "100% lost you," I hope you enjoy the steady diet of Republican administrations you'll wind up getting. Maybe by the time of the Rand Paul administration, you'll have learned your lesson. And maybe it won't be too late...but I doubt it.

[HipChick]

7. +100..well said

[ZombieHorde]

12. Can you explain the logic of the "well said" post to me? nt

[LostinVA]

8. Just curious -- just what lesson will they have learned?

[ZombieHorde]

10. I am also curios about the lesson. nt

[ZombieHorde]

11. We are going to get a Rand Paul administration if she does not change her mind?

"if you think Obama is a traitor, and has "100% lost you," I hope you enjoy the steady diet of Republican administrations you'll wind up getting. Maybe by the time of the Rand Paul administration, you'll have learned your lesson. And maybe it won't be too late...but I doubt it."

What does mean? This makes no sense whatsoever.

[mitchtv]

14. Pesident Palin BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

same ole; same ole

[Greyhound]

15. Be afraid, be very afraid!

You must accept and be happy with the moldy heel, for the other guys will deny you even that!:scared:
:rofl:

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluebear]

32. OK . . . . **SIR**

[Odin2005]

41. I worked my ass of for him during the campaign thinking he was NOT a bigoted corporatist.

So yes, I DO feel betrayed. And lied to. And stabbed in the back.

I have had it with "compromise", fuck it, if the American people choose Right-Wing stupidity than we deserve our fate.

[Bluebear]

42. +

[undeterred]

13. And how does one prove rape or incest?

Very few rapes are successfully prosecuted. Many women have unwanted pregnancies. Do women who were not raped have to claim that they were in order to get an abortion? All a woman has is her word, and we know how far that goes.

[babylonsister]

16. What's changed? Have elective abortions been

covered by insurance and I missed it?

[sandnsea]

19. This is the federal pre-existing plan

Not the exchanges which actually are private insurance. They're wanting a direct federal plan to cover elective abortions when no other federal plan does. Medicare For All certainly wouldn't. And nothing in the health care bill ever said the pre-existing condition plan would cover all abortions.

The right will destroy the world so they can have $5 more taxes or $1 cheaper gas. But there's a whole hell of a lot the left will destroy the world over too, if they don't get their own way. I think 90% of the world is just greedy selfish fucks.

[ProSense]

21. Here is Naral's statement

<...>

The policy, while not yet public, reportedly bans abortion services in a newly created program for individuals with pre-existing conditions or other high-risk medical needs (with the exceptions of life, rape, and incest). The high-risk pools are designed to be a transitional program as the federal government works to create the health-insurance exchanges set to take effect in 2014.

link

The policy hasn't been issued. Evidently, Naral and others are responding to reports sparked by a RW lie, which Think Progress addresses here: Will States Be Able To Fund Abortions Through The High Risk Pools?

HHS statement:

Statement of HHS Spokeswoman Jenny Backus on the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan Policy

As is the case with FEHB plans currently, and with the Affordable Care Act and the President's related Executive Order more generally, in Pennsylvania and in all other states abortions will not be covered in the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) except in the cases of rape or incest, or where the life of the woman would be endangered.

Our policy is the same for both state and federally-run PCIP programs. We will reiterate this policy in guidance to those running the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan at both the state and federal levels. The contracts to operate the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan include a requirement to follow all federal laws and guidance.

[sandnsea]

22. responding to a right wing lie, I know

I posted that above. The right wing said there were going to be federally funded abortions and the statement was issued in response. These other groups took that statement and twisted it into an attack on Obama. I don't know whether the left or right is worse these days.

[Cerridwen]

20. Yes and yes.

Yes they have been covered, including federally funded "elective" abortions for federal employees and yes, if you didn't know this, you missed it.

And, yes, again, there are insurance companies who have offered coverage for "elective" abortion (link below). Those companies may not now offer that coverage and participate in the newly created insurance exchanges.

The best available evidence—from two studies conducted by the Guttmacher Institute and the Kaiser Family Foundation—suggests that most Americans with employer-based insurance currently have coverage for abortion. Further, as outlined above, direct billing does not equate to either extent of coverage or even use of coverage. Guttmacher’s 13% statistic, therefore, should not be cited as evidence that insurance coverage for abortion is not widespread or to suggest that restricting such coverage would have an impact on only a small minority of women. link (emphasis added)

[lamp_shade]

23. Well there's three minutes I'll never get back.

Check your facts before you post this kind of crap.

[apples and oranges]

25. I think what the rule is saying is that

if you're already pregnant, you can't sign on to the plan and get an elective abortion. If you become pregnant after already having the coverage than you can get one.

[Pisces]

28. There is no outrage here. Nothing is being taken away from people. Anyone who wants

an abortion can still get one!! In the case of Rape, Incest and life of the mother you will be covered. What is the problem?????? I am a woman and do not see the controversy. Nobody took away any rights, you just don't get it for free.

[Bluebear]

34. >What is the problem?????? I am a woman and do not see the controversy.

Well, you never do!!!!!!!!!!! Just sayin'!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pisces]

37. This is for elective abortions. Nothing is different. If you want an abortion you can get one.

[Bluebear]

38. Planned Parenthood or Pisces, who will I believe. Let's see.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8763493&mesg_id=8763493

[Greyhound]

30. ..

[Odin2005]

40. Obama has lost my vote with this.

I refuse to go along with the compromising of people's rights over to evil bigots in exchange for a political win.